So can SoSH talk about Deflategate again?

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
https://sports.yahoo.com/10-year-old-kid-won-science-fair-proving-tom-brady-cheater-184439991.html
I hope this little twerp enjoys the NFCCG.

(I know he ate crow later)

As for the antisemitism issue with Deflategate, I am positive that back in the summer of Deflategate we had a pretty extensive go-round with this issue and the more general anti-New England-liberals element in the national hostility to the Pats. I'm not going back through those threads myself, but it is there. I think it is accurate critique too: part of the hatred of the Pats is wrapped up in only thinly veiled other hostilities, including antisemitism.
Hatred of the Pats is tied in with antisemitism? That feels like a bit much.

How many fans even know that the Patriots' owner is Jewish, let alone care, let alone hate them for that instead of for winning non-stop for 20 years?
 

Phil Plantier

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 7, 2002
3,419
Imagine you see this as a cultural precursor to Trumpism. Because a lot of us do.

Imagine you actually care about due process and the notion of fairness. Because a lot of us do.

Imagine that first round draft picks actually matter. Because they do.

Imagine having a quarter of a million dollars stolen from you. Because it was from Tom Brady.
1. I do, but for reasons that may surprise you.
2. I do, but the players collectively bargained that away. Are you caping for all of the other players this happened to?
3. I think there might be a few people on this board who do not believe the Patriots would have picked a quality player at that position.
4. aka, 1% of his salary for one year. I'm not feeling the rage, sorry.
 

Comfortably Lomb

Koko the Monkey
SoSH Member
Feb 22, 2004
12,959
The Paris of the 80s
It's been a few years and sometimes perspective can change with time. I've landed on two conclusions:
  • Even if Brady liked out of range PSI the NFL blew it entirely out of proportion. I still can't figure why the rule exists or why anyone should care since it just doesn't impact the on-field play in a significant way.

  • I can't help but draw parallels between Deflategate and what has happened in the right-wing political world over the past few years. The way it was handled was dishonest, overblown, and basically driven by a critical mass of incredibly stupid but aligned public opinion that had nothing to do with fairness and everything to do with a side winning for the sake of winning. People (outside of the Patriots fan base) laughed it all off but I think the signs were there that a lot of people's brains weren't functioning properly anymore.
 

CR67dream

blue devils forevah!
Dope
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
7,193
I'm going home
If that was the first time you noticed a patently bullshit story become "truth", and you're over 15 years old, then you just weren't paying enough attention prior to that.
If you don't think the speed, scope, and scale of Deflategate was above and beyond virtually everything that came before it, I don't know what to tell you.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Well one of the things that REALLY bothers me about all this is this: NBC, CBS, ESPN, whomever - could have done a very simple thing. Take a standard Wilson NFL game-issue football to a game where the weather is going to be rainy and about 50 degrees. There are plenty of those during an NFL season. Leave it indoors at about 70 degrees (which is about the temp where the footballs are stored indoors before a game) with the pressure set to, oh, 12.5 psi. Then bring it out during the game and leave it exposed to the cold, wet conditions for a half of football.

And then check the air pressure again. Using this simple calculator here, you can make a prediction of what the psi will be: http://physics.bu.edu/~schmaltz/deflate.html

The wet conditions will make it drop a little more as that has a compounding effect, but this simple calculator - which uses actual laws of physics - gives you an idea of what the psi ought to be. And it turns out it should be about 11.5 psi under these conditions.

And then take the same gauge you used to measure the psi inside (at 12.5 psi at 70 degrees) and measure it again after a half of football in these conditions.

Voila. There's the answer. If the psi is 11.5 (or thereabouts depending on the amount of moisture), then you've confirmed that science is at "fault" here, and the NFL is full of crap. If the psi is still 12.5, then maybe you conclude something different.

But this was SO simple to do, and to my knowledge, NO news/sports agency did this. Or at least, if they did, they didn't publish the results probably because the NFL would never do another TV contract with CBS if CBS was the one to make this information known.

So frustrating that this simple thing wasn't done.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,462
Gallows Hill
Well one of the things that REALLY bothers me about all this is this: NBC, CBS, ESPN, whomever - could have done a very simple thing. Take a standard Wilson NFL game-issue football to a game where the weather is going to be rainy and about 50 degrees. There are plenty of those during an NFL season. Leave it indoors at about 70 degrees (which is about the temp where the footballs are stored indoors before a game) with the pressure set to, oh, 12.5 psi. Then bring it out during the game and leave it exposed to the cold, wet conditions for a half of football.

And then check the air pressure again. Using this simple calculator here, you can make a prediction of what the psi will be: http://physics.bu.edu/~schmaltz/deflate.html

The wet conditions will make it drop a little more as that has a compounding effect, but this simple calculator - which uses actual laws of physics - gives you an idea of what the psi ought to be. And it turns out it should be about 11.5 psi under these conditions.

And then take the same gauge you used to measure the psi inside (at 12.5 psi at 70 degrees) and measure it again after a half of football in these conditions.

Voila. There's the answer. If the psi is 11.5 (or thereabouts depending on the amount of moisture), then you've confirmed that science is at "fault" here, and the NFL is full of crap. If the psi is still 12.5, then maybe you conclude something different.

But this was SO simple to do, and to my knowledge, NO news/sports agency did this. Or at least, if they did, they didn't publish the results probably because the NFL would never do another TV contract with CBS if CBS was the one to make this information known.

So frustrating that this simple thing wasn't done.
Why would they want to kill the story? It provided many hours of talking head “content” for them at a higher than usual rating.
 

CR67dream

blue devils forevah!
Dope
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
7,193
I'm going home
Wars have started in similar ways. Elections have been won, etc., etc.
It's undoubtedly true that Big Lies have been the basis for both of those things. Your assertion that someone would have to be 15 years old to not have seen it vividly just seems a bit uncharitable. And in the examples of cases I can think of, these happenings occurred before social media was a driving factor, which is where the speed and scope come in. Those events took a lot more time to spread and bear fruit than the five seconds it took Mort to send a tweet.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Why would they want to kill the story? It provided many hours of talking head “content” for them at a higher than usual rating.
The "they" being the NFL or CBS? The NFL would want to kill it because it would show that they railroaded Brady just.....because they wanted to, not because there's any validity to their claims. CBS would want to kill it because the NFL might say, "If you go public with this, you're never getting another contract with us again." No need to kill the golden goose. $$ talks.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
Can you give us an example of the type of events you are claiming to be of that same speed, scope, and size?
I mean, I don't know what you're getting at in terms of scope and size; as important as it was to me that Tom Brady not be suspended or the Patriots not lose a draft pick, previous examples of baseless/false claims becoming "truth" and being used as to support popular but morally unjust actions have cost lives, or in some cases many lives.

There are hundreds of well-known examples, I'm sure. The Dreyfus Affair...the USS Maine...the Tonkin Gulf "Incident"...people in power using convenient falsehoods to punish their enemies is not exactly a new phenomenon.

So yes, if you were an adult when Deflategate happened and that was the first time you realized that the media and the powerful in general aren't always giving the public the real truth, and sometimes even mislead you intentionally to support their own ends, then I would argue you haven't been paying close attention.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,462
Gallows Hill
The "they" being the NFL or CBS? The NFL would want to kill it because it would show that they railroaded Brady just.....because they wanted to, not because there's any validity to their claims. CBS would want to kill it because the NFL might say, "If you go public with this, you're never getting another contract with us again." No need to kill the golden goose. $$ talks.
If the league office wanted to kill the story, they would have. This was all about disgruntled ex-Jets employees working for the league looking to screw the Patriots.
 

GeorgeCostanza

tiger king
SoSH Member
May 16, 2009
7,286
Found in central mass
The "they" being the NFL or CBS? The NFL would want to kill it because it would show that they railroaded Brady just.....because they wanted to, not because there's any validity to their claims. CBS would want to kill it because the NFL might say, "If you go public with this, you're never getting another contract with us again." No need to kill the golden goose. $$ talks.
I think he meant why would they want to kill the NFL narrative of the deflate gate story.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
If the league office wanted to kill the story, they would have. This was all about disgruntled ex-Jets employees working for the league looking to screw the Patriots.
I mean that if CBS did this experiment and proved the NFL was completely full of crap, Goodell would have been exposed as simply wanting to go after the Pats for some reason. It's clear from the fact that the NFL didn't make public the results of their football measurements in 2015 (assuming they even went through with it) that the NFL didn't want this exposed.

I think he meant why would they want to kill the NFL narrative of the deflate gate story.
"They" being CBS or whomever? I'm confused. haha
 

Hoya81

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2010
8,457
The whole thing should have been been shutdown once everyone realized that the refs weren't logging the PSIs pregame (which no one had ever asked for), basically making it impossible to determine how/why the balls were out of compliance.

Without McNally's trip to the restroom, they might have done just that. But unfortunately that was enough to hang nefarious intent on every NE individual involved.
 

CR67dream

blue devils forevah!
Dope
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
7,193
I'm going home
There are hundreds of well-known examples, I'm sure. The Dreyfus Affair...the USS Maine...the Tonkin Gulf "Incident"...people in power using convenient falsehoods to punish their enemies is not exactly a new phenomenon.

So yes, if you were an adult when Deflategate happened and that was the first time you realized that the media and the powerful in general aren't always giving the public the real truth, and sometimes even mislead you intentionally to support their own ends, then I would argue you haven't been paying close attention.
The fact that you had to go back to the 19th Century for two of those examples and into the last one for the other doesn't really support your point very well.

No one is saying they didn't know some history or events in the abstract, just that it was the first time they were smacked in the face with it in real time in such a concrete, tangible manner. What I'm saying is that your shot was cheap and your point does not stand up to scrutiny.
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
38,144
The whole text messaging "IM THE DEFLATOR" and the trip to the restroom with the balls was such an absurd part of the saga.
 

drbretto

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
12,074
Concord, NH
If that was the first time you noticed a patently bullshit story become "truth", and you're over 15 years old, then you just weren't paying enough attention prior to that.
No on this scale, and this fast. This was another level. This was the first sign that things are different, fundamentally. The way information travels is diffferent.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
The fact that you had to go back to the 19th Century for two of those examples and into the last one for the other doesn't really support your point very well.

No one is saying they didn't know some history or events in the abstract, just that it was the first time they were smacked in the face with it in real time in such a concrete, tangible manner. What I'm saying is that your shot was cheap and your point does not stand up to scrutiny.
Yeah, and I'm still saying you're just wrong. If your point is that information travels more quickly in the social media age...ok. If you're saying that Deflategate was the first time a baseless falsehood quickly became accepted as true and used to punish an enemy, I'd counter with the fact that it happened to the Patriots a few years previously in the "Spygate" debacle. And probably a hundred other times to various parties in between.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
No on this scale, and this fast. This was another level. This was the first sign that things are different, fundamentally. The way information travels is diffferent.
Now you're talking about a global, systemic problem that stems from the speed of information (true or false), specifically in social media (Twitter, etc.). Something can get posted and be in the hands and minds of tens of millions of people in minutes. Of course, it also should mean that corrected information should ALSO be able to get in the hands and minds of those people that fast too.

Which is why maybe the worst damning part of all this is that the NFL knew it was feeding Mort bad information, had the means to correct it instantly, and chose to leave it hanging out there precisely because there was a narrative they wanted to tell (bad, evil Patriots). They could have nipped this in the bud instantaneously after Mort's tweet, but nope.
 

CR67dream

blue devils forevah!
Dope
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
7,193
I'm going home
Yeah, and I'm still saying you're just wrong. If your point is that information travels more quickly in the social media age...ok. If you're saying that Deflategate was the first time a baseless falsehood quickly became accepted as true and used to punish an enemy, I'd counter with the fact that it happened to the Patriots a few years previously in the "Spygate" debacle. And probably a hundred other times to various parties in between.
I think I've been pretty clear in what I'm saying, but yes, the social media aspect, and the effect of the story spiraling with the speed it did is a huge part of it. Read the post you are critquing again.

In fact, it was my first large-scale example of watching an emergent "truth" come from nothing. It's a really, really interesting worldwide science experiment. It's basically the same effect that brings us flat earthers and Qanon, as far as I'm concerned. Not at all limited to football.
Drbretto's experience has nothing to do with not understanding that those things you mention happened as a matter of historical fact, just that Deflategate, in real time, hit him in a way that stood out from others, which IMO stands up to reason. Your implication that it was a stupid and or ignorant take is where my objection is rooted.

Beyond that, the shot was simply gratuitous and unnecessary.
 
Last edited:

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,191
Bob Kravitz just published an article on The Athletic where he begins to own that Deflategate was a sham. The catalyst is a documentary that is coming out by Julie Marron called "Four Games in Fall". She basically eviscerates the NFL and Roger Goodell -- who shamelessly declined to be interviewed or comment on anything.

https://theathletic.com/2328221/2021/01/19/deflategate-tom-brady-patriots-colts/
It is behind a paywall -- and much more will hopefully come on this. As I mentioned in the Insurrection thread (and others said as well), I have said for years now that if I were a younger man my thesis would be on how "Deflategate" was a precursor to the "Big Lie". Coming off of Lame Duck's demise, I don't think I can handle the schadenfreudegasm that I would have if any of this rolled back up to Goodell. There would also be a bit reserved for all the times MODs have smacked down DFG conversations and references here (somewhat understandably, somewhat frustratingly).

Here were some excerpts for those that do not have subscription to The Athletic (you really should):
I have not read a Bob Kravitz article of any type since DFG started....until this one. I was happy to have done so---while characteristically smarmy, biased, and self-congratulatory the facts here are so blatantly obvious he finally had to deal with them. A few favorite elements of thsi? Recognition that he was duped and a part of a gigantic screw-up? Yes. The pathetic attempts to reframe the discussion to save a little face? Enjoyable. The brief recitation of all the ridiculous things the NFL did and did not do? Amusing to read from him. Even his bitterness at being persecuted by Pats fans was fun.

I am only saddened that fellow DFGer dcmissile did not get to enjoy the piece as well.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,726
Deep inside Muppet Labs
The whole thing should have been been shutdown once everyone realized that the refs weren't logging the PSIs pregame (which no one had ever asked for), basically making it impossible to determine how/why the balls were out of compliance.

Without McNally's trip to the restroom, they might have done just that. But unfortunately that was enough to hang nefarious intent on every NE individual involved.
McNally spent about a minute in the bathroom IIRC. You can't even pick up and put back 12 footballs in a wheelbarrow in a minute. Given that no matter the size or age of a human it takes about 30 seconds to void urine, the answer to what McNally was doing in the bathroom is pretty simple:

He was peeing.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
I think I've been pretty clear in what I'm saying, but yes, the social media aspect, and the effect of the story spiraling with the speed it did is a huge part of it. Read the post you are critquing again. Drbretto's experience has nothing to do with not understanding that those things you mention happened as a matter of historical fact, just that Deflategate, in real time, hit him in a way that stood out from others, which IMO stands up to reason. Your implication that it was a stupid and or ignorant take is where my objection is rooted.

Beyond that, the shot was simply gratuitous and unnecessary.
I wasn't taking a personal shot at Drbretto, from his response it seems like he understands that, but if not, sorry, Drbretto. I just disagree that Deflategate was any kind of groundbreaking event in the larger world.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
McNally spent about a minute in the bathroom IIRC. You can't even pick up and put back 12 footballs in a wheelbarrow in a minute. Given that no matter the size or age of a human it takes about 30 seconds to void urine, the answer to what McNally was doing in the bathroom is pretty simple:

He was peeing.
Applying Occam's Razor to this story comes out obviously in Brady/NE's favor, that what happened was this:

- The refs didn't give a crap about McNally taking the balls and leaving the room with them.
- He had to stop to urinate, so he did.
- During the cold wet game the footballs, per the laws of physics, lost some air pressure.
- The Pats' footballs were measured first (they were the ones the NFL was concerned about) and found to be low. After a number of minutes, during which time Indy's footballs had warmed up some, their footballs were measured, and came out a little higher.

Period. End of story. That's the entire chain of events of what "happened" for all intents and purposes. Occam's Razor being applied, this is the simplest, best answer. It answers every question except for (1) why did the NFL not care that McNally took the footballs when they had been "warned" about possible Pats' shenanigans ahead of time, and (2) what to make of the stupid dorito dink texts? The answer to (1) is almost certainly: because the NFL never ever ever ever EVER cared about air pressure in footballs before (or since, actually), and the answer to (2) is that they're a couple of regular stupid guys sending stupid pointless texts, and if you're combing through years' worth of texts LOOKING for something that even COULD POSSIBLY make someone look bad...uh...it's pretty easy to find.
 

Bergs

funky and cold
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
21,613
1. I do, but for reasons that may surprise you.
OK?

2. I do, but the players collectively bargained that away. Are you caping for all of the other players this happened to?
The players did so under an assumption of good faith in such matters. And to answer your entirely irrelevant question, yes, I think the Saints got fucked, and in retrospect, probably even Ritchie Incognito (ugh).

3. I think there might be a few people on this board who do not believe the Patriots would have picked a quality player at that position.
Oh. Well then nevermind. Draft picks don't matter. My bad. You should get an NFL consulting gig with your revolutionary "anti-draft" thesis on roster construction. I imagine the Jets would be interested.

4. aka, 1% of his salary for one year. I'm not feeling the rage, sorry.
25% actually. 4/16 = 0.25. Brady's base salary was $1MM in 2016. No one is asking you to "feel the rage", in fact I'm quite confident no single person on the planet gives a flying fuck what you think about this particular matter. But you stated: "I cannot comprehend the persecution that you (and others) feel about this topic." So I tried to enlighten you.

And out of curiosity, what does "I hate cultural explanations for things," mean? "Cultural explanations for things?" Huh?
 
Last edited:

CR67dream

blue devils forevah!
Dope
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
7,193
I'm going home
I wasn't taking a personal shot at Drbretto, from his response it seems like he understands that, but if not, sorry, Drbretto. I just disagree that Deflategate was any kind of groundbreaking event in the larger world.
Well telling someone they are not paying attention, if not a shot, certainly doesn't promote a good discussion.

I'll tell you, Deflategate was a huge eye opener for me. I was working in a small town newsroom at the time, and the sports editor, who I worked with closely as I split time between news and sports, lost his fucking mind. We had a screaming match across the newsroom after he kept insisting "they had to have fucked with the balls" based on absolutely nothing but a tweet and a reputation. No facts. No evidence. A journalist. And this is a guy who has since understood what happened to him, and was scared to death by it.

It gave me, as someone who pays attention, a huge fear that this sort of thing was going to be the new normal, and the thought of where it might lead in other spheres, was and remains terrifying. Definitely a watershed moment for me.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,726
Deep inside Muppet Labs
The case was decided in Goodell's favor essentially not due to facts of the case but because the CBA specified that Goodell could do whatever the fuck he wanted regardless of veracity of the case. That was it. The lower court which looked at the actual facts the NFL presented concluded the league had no case.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
The case was decided in Goodell's favor essentially not due to facts of the case but because the CBA specified that Goodell could do whatever the fuck he wanted regardless of veracity of the case. That was it. The lower court which looked at the actual facts the NFL presented concluded the league had no case.
Right. That's what this became. It was originally a chance for the NFL to stick it to the Pats - recall that most other owners thought that the Spygate penalty was too small (even though it was the largest penalty ever issued in NFL history) and that the Pats got off light, and that they wanted blood. This was their chance for it. And when everything was shown to be total crap, what Goodell was left with was defending his power to act however he wished "to preserve the integrity of the game" - never mind the fact that the integrity of the game is compromised greatly when you have a guy acting as dictator and can do whatever he wants capriciously per his own whim.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
What always got to me was the fact that they were heating the footballs earlier in the year in Minnesota and the NFL simply sent out a memo to say don't do that.

https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-to-remind-teams-not-to-warm-footballs-0ap3000000437309
Yep, I wrote about that at length. Just unfathomable that a league that actually saw football tampering happen live on TV *DURING A GAME* and all they did about it was send a memo, would then turn Deflategate into a crusade about the "integrity of the game".
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
It seems to me like that it would be a wonderful model for a Harvard business school case study of how to mishandle things in the modern media age. The league got haplessly got itself so committed to a narrative of cheating--based on apparently fake leak to Mortenson and a total lack of understanding of science--that it somehow found itself forced to pay roughly $20 million to lawyers and experts for the privilege of repeatedly punch themselves in the dick to pay a law firm to accuse perhaps the leagues biggest star and most prominent franchise of being cheaters.
 

Bowhemian

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2015
5,698
Bow, NH
What always got to me was the fact that they were heating the footballs earlier in the year in Minnesota and the NFL simply sent out a memo to say don't do that.

https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-to-remind-teams-not-to-warm-footballs-0ap3000000437309
Not to mention the A-Aron Rodgers story that was told during a national broadcast game about how he liked the balls to be over-inflated. They went on to mention how he would yell at the ball boys if they were not fat enough.
 

Bergs

funky and cold
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
21,613
It seems to me like that it would be a wonderful model for a Harvard business school case study of how to mishandle things in the modern media age. The league got haplessly got itself so committed to a narrative of cheating--based on apparently fake leak to Mortenson and a total lack of understanding of science--that it somehow found itself forced to pay roughly $20 million to lawyers and experts for the privilege of repeatedly punch themselves in the dick to pay a law firm to accuse perhaps the leagues biggest star and most prominent franchise of being cheaters.
Except it took the public's eye off of concussions for an entire offseason, and got likely got Goodell kudos from a bunch of owners. $20MM well-spent.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
Right. That's what this became. It was originally a chance for the NFL to stick it to the Pats - recall that most other owners thought that the Spygate penalty was too small (even though it was the largest penalty ever issued in NFL history) and that the Pats got off light, and that they wanted blood. This was their chance for it. And when everything was shown to be total crap, what Goodell was left with was defending his power to act however he wished "to preserve the integrity of the game" - never mind the fact that the integrity of the game is compromised greatly when you have a guy acting as dictator and can do whatever he wants capriciously per his own whim.
There was so much leftover bullshit from Spygate that impacted Deflategate that it's impossible to tease it all out.

In addition to above, there was this bizarre paradox that people simultaneously thought that the harshness of the Spygate penalty was proof of severe wrongdoing (and not merely the technical violation that it was), but at the same time Goodell was "soft" on Kraft because Kraft was a "shadow commissioner."

My take has always been that:
A) Goodell, new Commissioner, was overly harsh on Spygate because he wanted to set a tone of authority in the face of Belichick's disrespect for the rules;
B) Kraft, because he recognized the need to ingratiate himself to the league in light of what happened in Spygate, made it his business to be useful to Goodell, particularly in negotiating the 2011 collective bargaining agreement, for which he received the lion's share of credit.
C) Other owners begin resenting the attention Kraft is getting, and suspicious of his closeness with Goodell, start spreading the "Shadow Commissioner" whisper campaign to play up Goodell's insecurity;
D) Goodell, in order to dispel the image of Kraft's influence, uses Deflategate to smack the Patriots again and in the process determine the actual legal lines of his own authority. This was made possible from a PR standpoint due to the lack of correction issued for the reasons behind A.

And through all of Deflategate, Kraft naively thought he would get a fair shake because he had acted in good faith toward Goodell, and served the league well, since 2008. That everyone saw he was being shivved in real time while he played softball until it was too late made it all the more infuriating.
 
Last edited:

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
61,996
New York City
A lot of people are looking back and believing the Pats got railroaded. This is unture. And, as far as I understand it, it was more probable than not that Tom Brady deflated the balls, based on made up evidence and the ignoring of science.

Case fucking closed. Brady was lucky he didn't get suspended for a year. The CHEATRIOTS always slither out of problems.!!!1111!!!!
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
Except it took the public's eye off of concussions for an entire offseason, and got likely got Goodell kudos from a bunch of owners. $20MM well-spent.
That's what makes it an interesting study. Is there such a thing as bad press? Is the value of smacking down a leading player worth if from a labor relations standpoint? Is having a commissioner who is willing to bully an unpopular team to curry favor with the other 31 teams a good management structure?
 

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
7,199
CA
McNally spent about a minute in the bathroom IIRC. You can't even pick up and put back 12 footballs in a wheelbarrow in a minute. Given that no matter the size or age of a human it takes about 30 seconds to void urine, the answer to what McNally was doing in the bathroom is pretty simple:

He was peeing.
My colleague who was a high school classmate of McNally loves the part of him being the mastermind the most. He said that McNally was a nice guy, total doofus/meathead who was the epitome of big, dumb, beer-drinking fratboy -- except he didn't go to college. The mere thought that he was somehow involved in executing on a conspiracy to make sure Tom Brady was taken care of so the Patriots could win Superbowls made him giggle every single time. He could never get past it "Dude, you just got to know this guy. . . . .[laughter]"
 

JayMags71

Member
SoSH Member
After allowing CK to get blackballed, and Goodell's disgraceful handling of Ray Rice assaulting his wife, this was the hill the NFL believed it should die on. The pursuit of every last legal remedy to enforce a dubious punishment was the final straw in my NFL fandom. They really showed their priorities. Fuck the NFL.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Hatred of the Pats is tied in with antisemitism? That feels like a bit much.

How many fans even know that the Patriots' owner is Jewish, let alone care, let alone hate them for that instead of for winning non-stop for 20 years?
Wondering if it's:

Arthur Blank
Marc Davis (yup)
the Glazer family
Jim Irsey (sad but true)
Jeff Lurie
Stephen Ross
Daniel Snyder
Steve Tisch
Zigi Wilf

who are the Anti-Semitic members of the ownership club.

Or one of the 22 goyim.
 

EL Jeffe

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2006
1,314
I recognize that this I'm opening myself up to all sorts of derision, but c'est la vie. I'm not convinced NE was innocent here. Now, I'll grant ALL the caveats: no one has ever cared about air pressure, the 11.5-12.5 PSI range is completely arbitrary, every game played in hot or cold weather has had footballs out of compliance, teams have been caught manipulating footballs and no one batted an eyelash, the league acted in bad faith, no real proof was ever presented, etc., etc. Again, I grant and accept all the caveats.

Now...that being said, there are still a few uncomfortable facts that lead me to believe something MAY have happened. I have no idea if anything did happen; just a few things that don't add up for me.

1. It's been a while, but IIRC, there were like 3 footballs that were legitimately low and low on both gauges. Lower than what they should have been based on the air temperature. The AVERAGE of the footballs were fine (for the gauge that the referee specifically remembered using), but there were a a few individual footballs that were out of the expected range on both gauges. That in-and-of-itself isn't nefarious, but it's odd.
2. McNally, this older guy in poor shape, took the footballs with him to the bathroom. He was in there for 90 seconds. Now, 90 seconds is kind of long for a pee, or he dropped a quick deuce. Either way, why in the wide world of sports wouldn't you use the bathroom BEFORE lugging around a duffel of footballs with you? Particularly if you're an older, out of shape guy? It makes ZERO sense. The only explanation I can come up with was the bathroom was in use and he didn't feel like waiting. Other than that, it makes zero sense. Would you take your suitcase with you into the bathroom at the airport if you didn't have to? Of course not. It's possible there was a good reason for him doing it in that order, but I don't remember any defense being presented as to how it came to be. This is a real red flag for me (unless a good reason was presented by him, and I missed it.)
3. 90 seconds would be WAY too fast to deflate 12 footballs, but certainly not too fast to deflate 3 footballs. Again, I believe there were 3 footballs that had the low PSI numbers. Why would he stop at 3 footballs? I don't have a good answer for that. Maybe he heard someone outside and got spooked so he stopped. Maybe a message came through telling everyone to report to the field asap because the NFCC game had finished. The NFCC game went into OT, so the AFCC start time was in flux until the NFCC game abruptly ended. Given 1 & 2, 90 seconds is a reasonable timeline for deflating 3 footballs.

By themselves, none of these three data points are a big issue. But taken together, they make me wonder. I'm not saying there was any sort of nefarious plot. I doubt anyone on the team ever cared about PSI. However, I could see a scenario where Brady intimated that when the weather is crappy, he likes the footballs to be a tad softer to better grip them. I could see the equipment staff taking that info and making it inclement weather SOP to set the footballs to like 11 PSI and figuring that was fine because A) close enough, and B) no one has ever cared or enforced PSI rules (and why would or should they?). I don't think it was ever a coordinated effort, which is why it never showed up in texts. I'm sure Brady never asked anyone to take PSIs out of footballs. But I could see a scenario where it was just understood that inclement weather = let's try to make Brady's life easier by providing him with a football that's a bit easier to grip. (And yes, this is as much of a fictitious narrative as anything else. I'm just trying to make sense of data points 1, 2 & 3).

Teams should be able to play with footballs at whatever PSI they want, because who cares? The league never proved their case, so screw them. Wells acted in bad faith. Fans never gave a damn about PSI until NE was involved. All that is true, but there's still some stuff that doesn't add up for me (unless again, a reasonable defense has been provided for these data points and I missed them.)
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,726
Deep inside Muppet Labs
90 seconds makes sense for a pee if he was wearing a ton of cold weather clothing. Which he was.

He brought the footballs into the bathroom with him because the league had told the officials to be super judicious with the balls given the accusations the Ravens had bandied about the league. He was likely told not to let them out of his sight before they got to the sideline.
 
Last edited:

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
7,199
CA
I recognize that this I'm opening myself up to all sorts of derision, but c'est la vie. I'm not convinced NE was innocent here. Now, I'll grant ALL the caveats: no one has ever cared about air pressure, the 11.5-12.5 PSI range is completely arbitrary, every game played in hot or cold weather has had footballs out of compliance, teams have been caught manipulating footballs and no one batted an eyelash, the league acted in bad faith, no real proof was ever presented, etc., etc. Again, I grant and accept all the caveats.

Now...that being said, there are still a few uncomfortable facts that lead me to believe something MAY have happened. I have no idea if anything did happen; just a few things that don't add up for me.

1. It's been a while, but IIRC, there were like 3 footballs that were legitimately low and low on both gauges. Lower than what they should have been based on the air temperature. The AVERAGE of the footballs were fine (for the gauge that the referee specifically remembered using), but there were a a few individual footballs that were out of the expected range on both gauges. That in-and-of-itself isn't nefarious, but it's odd.
2. McNally, this older guy in poor shape, took the footballs with him to the bathroom. He was in there for 90 seconds. Now, 90 seconds is kind of long for a pee, or he dropped a quick deuce. Either way, why in the wide world of sports wouldn't you use the bathroom BEFORE lugging around a duffel of footballs with you? Particularly if you're an older, out of shape guy? It makes ZERO sense. The only explanation I can come up with was the bathroom was in use and he didn't feel like waiting. Other than that, it makes zero sense. Would you take your suitcase with you into the bathroom at the airport if you didn't have to? Of course not. It's possible there was a good reason for him doing it in that order, but I don't remember any defense being presented as to how it came to be. This is a real red flag for me (unless a good reason was presented by him, and I missed it.)
3. 90 seconds would be WAY too fast to deflate 12 footballs, but certainly not too fast to deflate 3 footballs. Again, I believe there were 3 footballs that had the low PSI numbers. Why would he stop at 3 footballs? I don't have a good answer for that. Maybe he heard someone outside and got spooked so he stopped. Maybe a message came through telling everyone to report to the field asap because the NFCC game had finished. The NFCC game went into OT, so the AFCC start time was in flux until the NFCC game abruptly ended. Given 1 & 2, 90 seconds is a reasonable timeline for deflating 3 footballs.

By themselves, none of these three data points are a big issue. But taken together, they make me wonder. I'm not saying there was any sort of nefarious plot. I doubt anyone on the team ever cared about PSI. However, I could see a scenario where Brady intimated that when the weather is crappy, he likes the footballs to be a tad softer to better grip them. I could see the equipment staff taking that info and making it inclement weather SOP to set the footballs to like 11 PSI and figuring that was fine because A) close enough, and B) no one has ever cared or enforced PSI rules (and why would or should they?). I don't think it was ever a coordinated effort, which is why it never showed up in texts. I'm sure Brady never asked anyone to take PSIs out of footballs. But I could see a scenario where it was just understood that inclement weather = let's try to make Brady's life easier by providing him with a football that's a bit easier to grip. (And yes, this is as much of a fictitious narrative as anything else. I'm just trying to make sense of data points 1, 2 & 3).

Teams should be able to play with footballs at whatever PSI they want, because who cares? The league never proved their case, so screw them. Wells acted in bad faith. Fans never gave a damn about PSI until NE was involved. All that is true, but there's still some stuff that doesn't add up for me (unless again, a reasonable defense has been provided for these data points and I missed them.)
I will not give you derision, but nothing you posted here in any way, shape, or form is an "uncomfortable fact" that would lead one believe that "something MAY have happened." It's just stuff that happened, that is trying to be twisted (poorly) into a narrative.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,937
Berkeley, CA
Why would they want to kill the story? It provided many hours of talking head “content” for them at a higher than usual rating.
This is another instance that mirrors Trump's rise and Deflategate. Fox, MSNBC, etc. all had a jump up in ratings once Trump started making some noise in his 2016 campaign. They could have limited/killed him from the start, but couldn't resist the ratings high. ESPN, etc. had the same addiction.
 

cornwalls@6

Less observant than others
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
6,247
from the wilds of western ma
After allowing CK to get blackballed, and Goodell's disgraceful handling of Ray Rice assaulting his wife, this was the hill the NFL believed it should die on. The pursuit of every last legal remedy to enforce a dubious punishment was the final straw in my NFL fandom. They really showed their priorities. Fuck the NFL.
I don’t think CK had anything to do with this. He played his last game on 1/1/17. The process had played out, and Brady served his suspension for the first 4 games of 2016.